Empty Words Delivered Well
Peggy Noonan reflects on Barack Obama's speeches. She judges him to be a brillant speaker - provided you don't actually read the words he delivered so brilliantly. Delivering words well is not eloquence.
Barack Obama's biggest draw is not his eloquence. When you watch an Obama speech, you lean forward and listen and think, That's good. He's compelling, I like the way he speaks. And afterward all the commentators call him "impossibly eloquent" and say "he gave me thrills and chills." But, in fact, when you go on the Internet and get a transcript of the speech and print it out and read it–that is, when you remove Mr. Obama from the words and take them on their own–you see the speech wasn't all that interesting, and was in fact high-class boilerplate. (This was not true of John F. Kennedy's speeches, for instance, which could be read seriously as part of the literature of modern American politics, or Martin Luther King's work, which was powerful absent his voice.)
Mr. Obama is magnetic, interacts with the audience, leads a refrain: "Yes, we can." It's good, and compared with Hillary Clinton and John McCain, neither of whom seems really to enjoy giving speeches, it comes across as better than it is. But is it eloquence? No. Eloquence is deep thought expressed in clear words. With Mr. Obama the deep thought part is missing. What is present are sentiments.
Noonan knows speeches and speechwriting well, of course. She knows the territory, so to speak. I would point out that there is a huge difference between true eloquence, truly delivering great thoughts in a brilliant manner and acting. Actors can take meaningless dialog written by a hack writer and deliver them brilliantly. So far, that is what Obama appears to be doing: delivering boilerplate exceedingly well.
That is not to say that meaningful words have not been delivered during this campaign, as Noonan goes on to point out. It's just that the words that have have a meaning have not been uttered by the candidate himself:
His problem was, is, his wife's words, not his, the speech in which she said that for the first time in her adult life she is proud of her country, because Obama is winning. She later repeated it, then tried to explain it, saying of course she loves her country. But damage was done. Why? Because her statement focused attention on what I suspect are some basic and elementary questions that were starting to bubble out there anyway.
Here are a few of them.
Are the Obamas, at bottom, snobs? Do they understand America? Are they of it? Did anyone at their Ivy League universities school them in why one should love America? Do they confuse patriotism with nationalism, or nativism? Are they more inspired by abstractions like "international justice" than by old visions of America as the city on a hill, which is how John Winthrop saw it, and Ronald Reagan and JFK spoke of it?
Have they been, throughout their adulthood, so pampered and praised–so raised in the liberal cocoon–that they are essentially unaware of what and how normal Americans think? And are they, in this, like those cosseted yuppies, the Clintons?
Why is all this actually not a distraction but a real issue? Because Americans have common sense and are bottom line. They think like this. If the president and his first lady are not loyal first to America and its interests, who will be? The president of France? But it's his job to love France, and protect its interests. If America's leaders don't love America tenderly, who will?
I am seeing more and more media analysis pointing out just how devoid of real meaning much of what Obama says really is. I suspect that this trend is going to continue as the media honeymoon Obama has been enjoying begins to give way to hard scrutiny.
By Yuri, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 8:32 am
"Are the Obamas, at bottom, snobs? Do they understand America? Are they of it? Did anyone at their Ivy League universities school them in why one should love America?"these questions (and other they raise) are actually easy to answer. Just look at their works on the South side of Chicago. The "empty message" argument doesn’t make sense. Before you can do anything specific you should stop yelling and start talking. An invitation to change the trench war politics and stop yelling across the isle is not therefore an empty message. This is a necessary first step. Anyone who actually bothered to find out what Obama did before he became a national politician knows that he is anything but "vapourware"…The man does give a good speech - and this is his strength, not weakness. Same as Mitt Romney’s hair
By ted goldman, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 9:23 am
The recap of Noonan’s article failed to give an example of Obama’s vapid and empty utterances.
Let the reader’s of Blue Crab make their own decisions concerning the depth of Obama’s shallowness.
By martian, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 9:35 am
Yuri, why don’t you tell us all just exactly what Obama accomplished on the south side of Chicago or anywhere else for that matter? I’ve been trying to find something he actually accomplished, something to give the man substance, for months and have yet to find out anything. I watched a news report the other night where a reporter actually approached several prominent Obama supporters and asked them to name one major accomplishment of Obama’s - to a person they couldn’t name one. I would really like to know what he has accomplished. Of course, you should be aware that any accomplishment you name will promptly be investigated, probably by several contributors here, to see if it’s an actual accomplishment of his or just something he is taking or other people are giving him credit for that was someone else’s actual work. After all, Democrats have a habit of taking credit for other peoples’ work (Al Gore invented the internet, etc.).
By NortonPete, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 10:47 am
Well I went to Obama’s official campaign site barackobama.com and the first thing you get is a video speech about together we will bring the change we want. They don’t want you getting any further than that unless you signup. I did get to the main page and took the time to read what the campaign wants us to know about Barack and all his accomplishments. I really couldn’t find anything noteworthy I might have accomplished more goofing around the last 30-40 years, but I digress.
Read it yourself and find something. add /learn/meet_barack.php to barackobama.com
Here is his sumation of his Senate years:
—-
In the U.S. Senate, he has focused on tackling the challenges of a globalized, 21st century world with fresh thinking and a politics that no longer settles for the lowest common denominator. His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent. He has also been the lead voice in championing ethics reform that would root out Jack Abramoff-style corruption in Congress.
As a member of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan. Recognizing the terrorist threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, he traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world. And knowing the threat we face to our economy and our security from America’s addiction to oil, he’s working to bring auto companies, unions, farmers, businesses and politicians of both parties together to promote the greater use of alternative fuels and higher fuel standards in our cars.
Whether it’s the poverty exposed by Katrina, the genocide in Darfur, or the role of faith in our politics, Barack Obama continues to speak out on the issues that will define America in the 21st century. But above all his accomplishments and experiences, he is most proud and grateful for his family. His wife, Michelle, and his two daughters, Malia, 9, and Sasha, 6, live on Chicago’s South Side where they attend Trinity United Church of Christ.
By NortonPete, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 10:57 am
I just read through the last two Obama speeches on that same website. There are lots of references to the politics of hope and "together we will change America" but no facts, just an illusion to how bad wars are for everyone, and how Exxon is taking all our money. Well, so ends my attempt to further understand the man, I don’t need to spend anymore time.
By MikeO, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 10:59 am
Yuri,<br/><br/>How do you propose to end "trench warfare" and "yelling across the isle (sic)" in this country?<br/><br/>Mrs. Obama’s words give me a pretty good idea that Senator Obama plans to end it by "fixing [my] soul" and demanding that I "put down [my] divisions" and abandon the life that I have to pursue the Senator’s vision of utopia.<br/><br/>I will gleefully yell across the aisle at any idiot with so poor a grasp of The United States Constitution and modern history as to suggest that I consent to grant my government the power to demand those things of me.<br/><br/>As somebody who expresses such pride of his superior knowledge of the USSR, how can you be so wilfully ignorant of totalitarianism’s simple recipe?
Armies of the "disaffected" to achieve battlefield or electoral victory
A cadre of "useful idiots" preaching the glories of collectivization as only true believers can
A charismatic narcissist who, by the greatness of his soul, deigns to be our Messiah and our "opiate of the masses"
Bring to a boil slowly lest the frogs catch a clue and jump from the pot
If you are willing to pave this road to hell with your good intentions, then knock yourself out, but know that I will be there to undermine you every step of the way.
By syn, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 11:36 am
Obama was one of the few Senators who actually voted for partial-birth procedure.
First-trimester is not thing however there does come a point when women must not have the right to do something so inhuman and barbaric.
But the thing I find so hopeless, disheartening and confusing is that a member of a religious institutionssuch as Trinity United Church of Christ would support something which is the antithesis of God’s words. I mean Methodist ministers endorsing Obama???
When religious insitiutions led the way to end slavery none of them were saying ‘even though I believe slavery is a sin I cannot tell the slave owners what to do with their slaves so I will vote for the slave owners right to own slaves’
If religious instituions back then were doing what religious institutions are doing today, slavery would never have ended; neither Obama or his wife would be free to be Ivy League snobs.
The progressive Left has done more damage to the black community since it assumed complete domination over their lives; the point when offering them the Government’s Golden Coins of Entitlement in exchange for their vote meant exterminating their populations, castrating their men and their role as father, depleating their ability to embrace self-reliance. In other words, every time a black or African-American votes for Planned Parenthood, they are aiding Sanger’s ‘Negro Project’ .
Some hope Obama offers.
By TimF, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 1:00 pm
Obama is a reasonably effective public speaker (at least when he has a teleprompter or reasonably programmed format like a debate) a trait he shares with Bill Clinton, but which Hillary and W have difficulty with. Out of principle, I try to never watch a speech live (with select exceptions). Rather, I read the transcript after the fact. This let’s me focus on the ideas presented rather than the mannerisms and ‘theater’ of the speech itself. Do that with Obama’s speeches and you’ll see how hollow they really are (Of course I’ve worked for a Fortune 50 company for almost 30 years, so I’ve had lots of training in skeptical reading of management PR).
By MikeO, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 2:06 pm
Sorry. I got so carried-away in my "no common ground, ever" response to Yuri that I neglected to mention what made me click into this article in the first place.
Senator Obama’s speeches–especially the parts "borrowed" from Governor Patrick’s successful campaign–are ham-handed Neuro-Linguistic Programming parlor tricks. Specifically, these speeches–or rather, the ambiguity-reinforcing patterns contained therein–are exemplars of Milton Model hypnotic suggestion. Obama has what it takes to make it work for now, but once the debates in the general election corners him into stating specifics, the spell will break.
By Mockinbird, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 3:33 pm
Alot of you guys have flat left me in the dust.
Politicians often pay thousand$ for your kind of analyses.
By NortonPete, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 3:48 pm
I am with you Mockingbird, I am going to start looking up Milton Model hypnotic suggestion, but I am not stupid, I know if I ever accused someone in these parts off using "ham-handed Neuro-Linguistic Programming parlor tricks" , I’d get a blank stare and then a mouthful of knuckles.
By MikeO, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 5:06 pm
Doh! NortonPete, I should know better than to stick-out my jaw like that.
Wikipedia has a decent page on this stuff at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_model , but most of the information there is in the context of therapy. I first heard about NLP and hypnotic suggestion from a buddy who sold Cadillacs for a living. In short, it’s deliberate vagueness and carefully chosen words intended to manipulate the subconscious without upsetting the conscious mind. The speaker herds the listener toward filling-in the big blank with the listener’s own desires in such a way that the listener is convinced that doing X can make these desires happen. "X" can be casting a particular vote, buying a particular product, or taking the speaker home for a one-night stand.
Not everyone is susceptible to this kind of Jedi mindtrick-fu, but there are enough out there to keep legions of grifters going. It sent a tingle up Chris Matthew’s leg, didn’t it?
I said that Obama and Patrick are ham-handed about it because they make no effort to conceal what they are doing. Upon further reflection, I realize they may be geniuses because I have not seen anybody else call them on it.
By NortonPete, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 6:23 pm
MikeO,
I did do some research and thanks for kicking it up a notch. You are spot on with Milton’s Model which says "you cannot consciously instruct the unconscious mind" , this makes great sense from the few psychology courses I took. I agree with your analysis. I was having some fun with your ham-handed NLP because it is very astute, a bit more astute then the victims are. A great post on your part, thanks for the brain engage.
Bluecrabboulevard is a great thinking person’s website. I’ll discuss Milton’s model at the next highbrow party I’ll get thrown out of.
Pete
By feeblemind, Friday, 22 February , 2008 @ 7:43 pm
MikeO, I am sure glad you commented. That was probably the most interesting thing I have read today. My observation of Obama’s rhetoric is much more shallow. Everytime I hear Obama I can’t help but think of PG Wodehouse’s character, Roderick Spode the amateur dictator, from the Jeeves & Wooster stories. Spode would speak to his minions uttering such deep thoughts as, "Tomorrow is a new day. The future lies ahead. and, We must have Progress." I sometimes wonder if Obama is really plaigarizing Spode?
By martian, Saturday, 23 February , 2008 @ 1:11 pm
Well, I checked back here over 24 hours after my request to Yuri to tell us exactly what it was that Obama has accomplished on the south side of Chicago or anywhere else to see if he responded - with the results that you see above. Not only has he not responded or listed ANY accomplishment by Obama but others who took up the challenge (thanks, NortonPete) and went looking for accomplishments found pretty much nothing. I think this illustrated the point - he’s running on his (supposed) good looks, hypnotic voice quality and likeable personality and not much else. He is no more than a stuffed shirt, an actor playing the part of presidential candidate - when are people going to wake up to this?
By NortonPete, Saturday, 23 February , 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Yeah Obama owes me an hour back.
I hope MikeO comes back, that was some interesting analysis, I attempted a joke, which is hard to do on the internet, it probably went over like a lead balloon.
By feeblemind, Saturday, 23 February , 2008 @ 3:22 pm
Nortonpete: It was obviously a joke. I doubt any offense was taken. You are right about the difficulty of making jokes and/or kidding around online. There is no nonverbal feedback to go with the words and the reader may interpret the words according to his mood. None the less, we all keep trying.
By Yuri, Saturday, 23 February , 2008 @ 3:42 pm
martian: you caught me during a bad time: I’m on a long business trip and severely jet lagged. More later., I guess although this post will close soon the topic will continue
By phillip montgomery, Sunday, 24 February , 2008 @ 6:35 pm
oh, I see my post has been censured away.
By Gaius, Sunday, 24 February , 2008 @ 7:23 pm
Your comment was removed because it made a patently offensive, scurrilous and totally unwarranted statement. See the comment policy on the ‘About’ page.